Post by claviger
On Friday, August 3, 2018 at 9:44:39 AM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh Post by claviger
Accidental assassin: JFK theory alleges Secret Service agent fumbled ...
Nov 2, 2015 -
Post by claviger Post by Anthony Marsh Post by claviger
Accidental assassin: JFK theory alleges Secret Service agent
fumbled gun ... Nearly 20 years ago, Menninger laid out the
theory in "Mortal Error: ... firing an accidental shot and
the Secret Serviceman denied firing his weapon.
Post by claviger Post by Anthony Marsh
Aren't you the only being in the known universe who believes
that crazy theory?
Not exactly. A famous detective in Australia studied this case
for 4 years and came to the same conclusion. He uncovered even
more information we didn't know. Senior Detective McLaren wrote a
book about it and was the featured guest on a TV special here in
the US. Over 7 million viewers saw this program and his book did
very well in the USA. A new generation of Americans watched this
TV special and were impressed with McLaren's professional
Another moron. It wouldn't even stand up in court. The acoustical
evidence stood up in court.
The so-called "acoustic evidence" was an embarrassing flop.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You still don't know the difference between hardened lead and
Not as simple as you think. The FBI no longer relies on CABL.
I didn't say that. You can't tell the difference between the number
871 and 21,781. They both sound the same to you.
We have discussed this numerous times. CABL can vary from
We've been through this before. It is not a matter of the difference
between 100 and 800. I pointed out that the antimony level can vary by
about 400 ppm from one end of the bullet to the other.
But Listen carefully. You can never find a bullet fragment related to the
JFK assassination which has an antimony level as high at an AR-15 bullet.
The antimony levels rule out an AR-15.
The lead used for the cores of jacketed MC bullets was specified to be #0
soft lead (98.85% pure). WCC MC bullet jackets were made with CDA 220
bronze which is 90% copper and 10% zinc. The jacket is produced as an
empty shell and the lead core is physically pressed into it. Although
either lead-tin or lead-antimony can be used for the core, manufactures
typically don't incur the extra cost because the core is merely a
high-density filler material. Today, the normal specifications for soft
lead require <0.1% antimony. (Silver is an impurity that is difficult for
some smelters to remove except through dilution.) The Oswald bullets could
range from 0 to about 1200 ppm. I think the practice as Western was to
start with pure lead and dump in recycled lead which probably had higher
levels of antimony. But the mixing process did not ensure homogeny so some
areas in the bactch would have higher levels of antimony than others. But
no WWC bullet ever had close to 20,000 ppm of antimony.
You assume wrong because you know nothing about the subject. As I said
before 2% is about the lowest antimony level you will find in AR-15 or
M-16 bullets. Most are about 4% antimony. And they really don't care that
much if one batch is only 3% and another batch is 4%, but they are going
to reject a batch which is only .01%. That is not the specs. The 1954 DoD
contract was to specs to match the original Italian SMI specs which were
for UNhardened lead. The DoD specs for the M193 are for hardened lead.
Simple black and white difference. Not even any shades of gray.
Post by claviger
batch to batch, box to box, and bullet to bullet from the same box. It
can even vary within the same bullet! The reason being Sb 51 is the
most volatile element in the bullet making process.
Wrong. Contracts specify if the lead is going to be hardened or unhardened.
The U.S. military does not use M193 ammunition anymore.
If you can find a government contract for M193 ammo dated post 2004,
please post it - I have been looking.
M193 is a SPCIFICATION of ammo as listed in TM43-0001-27.
Chapter 10 is what you want.
It lists exactly how it is constructed and what it has to do to meet
So, anyone can make ammo and label it M193, hopefully it meets the
Already by 1971, Guinn had focused on antimony as the principal
indicator element in bullet lead. The reason antimony was so useful was
that it was added to some leads up to 4% or so as a hardening agent. This
made its concentration range from 10 or 20 ppm un virgin lead to 40,000
ppm in hardened lead, a much larger range than for elements that were not
added to the lad. Guinn listed the concentrations of antimony in each of
the 36 lots of bullets. He also listed the concentrations of 1???3 other
elements if he was able to measure them. The 36 concentrations of antimony
are shown in Figure 10. A logarithmic scale had to be used for antimony
because its concentrations ranged over nearly four orders of magnitude.
Figure 10. Concentrations of antimony in 36 lots of bullets.
The range of antimony in Mannlicher-Carcano bullets reported by
Guinn, 20???1200 ppm, is also shown, for comparison. It corresponds almost
exactly to a group of seven bullets that is below the other 29 by nearly
an order of magnitude. (The cause of the two distinct groups is probably
just hardened lead versus unhardened lead in the bullets.)
By contrast, Guinn found that silver varied much less in
concentration in the suite of bullets???two orders of magnitude vs. the
four for antimony. The reason is probably just that silver is not
deliberately added to bullets. Guinn also found that the concentration
of silver in Mannlicher-Carcano bullets falls in the middle of the range
of concentrations for other types of bullets (Figure 11). The reason for
this is also presumably that silver is not added to lead the way
Figure 11. Concentrations of silver in 36 lots of bullets.
The data from Figures 10 and 11 can be used to find the
probability of getting false positives, that is, the chance that piece
of lead that appears to be from a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet is actually
from another kind of bullet. We can calculate the probabilities for
fragments in general and for those from the assassination. Consider
first the general case where a bullet or a fragment contains antimony in
the WCC/MC range. The chance that it is not a WCC/MC bullet is shown in
Figure 10 as 7/36, which is the fraction of Guinn's 36 test bullets that
had the concentration of a Mannlicher-Carcano but were something else.
Thus by using only antimony, there is a 7/36 (19%) chance of falsely
identifying the bullet as Mannlicher-Carcano.
A 19% chance of a false positive is pretty high. The probability
can be lowered by also using silver, the most useful element that Guinn
found next to antimony. With silver alone, 4 of 19 bullets (21%) of
other types had concentrations in the range of Mannlicher-Carcanos
(Figure 11). So silver alone gives 20% false positives.
But silver with antimony is better. The simplest approach, incorrect
here, would be to just multiply the two probabilities of false positives
and get the probability of having simultaneous false positives,
(7/36)(4/19) = 4.1%. But since only 19 of the 36 test bullets contained
measurable silver, we should limit the comparison to those 19 bullets in
which both antimony and silver were measured. Although we could do this
from the table, a clearer way is to do it graphically, by plotting one
element versus the other. Figure 12 shows such a scatterplot for Sb vs.
Ag in MC bullets, other types, and the JFK fragments. The zones of
concentrations of antimony and silver for the MC bullets are shown by
the dashed horizontal and vertical lines, respectively. The rectangular
area between the two sets of lines represents the place where false
positives are found. Taking the multiplicative approach for false
positives used above, the figure for WCC/MC bullets would be
(5/19)(4/19) = 5.5%. This is equivalent to predicting that 5.5% of the
19 other types of bullets, or one bullet, would fall within the MC
ranges and give a false positive. In actuality, two of the 19 bullets
fall within the MC zone, for a probability of 2/19 = 10.5%. Given the
small number of bullets being considered here, the difference between
one and two is not significant. We may then conclude that the
probability of an apparent MC bullet really being something else is 5%???10%.
NB: Read Fragments